Quotes are taken from a message written by Dan to Charles on 08/10/96...
DT>.CB>I have read many more articles opposing Whole Language than I have
DT>.CB>supporting it, but maybe that's just where I'm looking.
DT>
DT>And now for your next assignment:  Begin looking for articles that fully 
DT>support WL and refute the information in the articles you cited.
He he!  You've got to be kidding?  I spent 5 or 6 hours locating those 
files, reading, highlighting and preparing my response.  I did it to 
support _MY_ contention that Whole Language is getting pretty soundly 
trashed in the media.  T don't think I'm about to put in that same 
amount of time to defend YOUR position.
DT>I am just guessing, but I think there are probably articles that would say 
DT>the opposite of the ones you've cited.
When I did my search on the WWW, I used only Whole and Language as my 
search words.  I turned up only two or three articles supporting the 
practice and none of them actually mentioned any specific research that 
would be useful in our debate.  Perhaps if you looked deeper, or used 
different search words, you might turn up something of use.
Chuck Beams
Fidonet - 1:2608/70
cbeams@future.dreamscape.com
___
* UniQWK #5290* 1 + 2 = 3, therefore 4 + 5 = 6!
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------